Creationist bloggers can be infuriating. If one has infuriated you by persisting in nonsense even when corrected, or refusing to reply to your criiticsm, you may feel driven to recording the fact. If so, you may register your disapproval here and hope a response is forthcoming.

The dishonest CMI liars have REMOVED my comment at their Facebook page* AND also silently BLOCKED me from the Facebook page - see the attached photo taken just now (showing that I can NO LONGER comment there).

So. When 'refuting' Dawkins on evolution Jonathan Sarfati totally FAILED to challenge any of what Dawkins wrote, in his preceding book, on the Second Law of Thermodynamics. And he openly stated on the CMI website in 2011 that creationists "should refrain from claiming that organic evolution contradicts the Second Law". Yet if a professional engineer decides "How can things evolve at all when the Second Law of Thermodynamics says everything will ultimately degrade? Our lecturer at the time simply dismissed our questioning and said ‘the Second Law doesn’t apply to living things’. To us, this meant evolution could still occur and therefore there was no God to worry about. His statement was completely false of course ..." and "I knew nothing can violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics and I knew that designing things takes a lot of intelligence, not random chance. I knew the Second Law meant things go downhill and get worse, not uphill and better" then the journalist and CMI colleague of Sarfati Warren Nunn (with apparently no scientific background) humours the engineer. And instead of pointing him to what Sarfati admitted in 2011 instead refers back to the undated but clearly earlier CMI article where Sarfati claimed "The open systems argument does not help evolution. Raw energy cannot generate the specified complex information in living things. Undirected energy just speeds up destruction". Whilst also claiming concerning that earlier Sarfati article that Gibson "came to understand the Second Law of Thermodynamics".

Nunn is also copied in on these emails so if he acted out of ignorance of what Sarfati wrote in 2011 he has apparently so far FAILED to correct that. Sarfati is also copied in (unless my emails to him are blocked); since he (also Tas Walker) has so far ignored my emails, it appears that Sarfati himself may be COMPLICIT in this deception. He is saying in effect "If Colin Gibson wants to believe falsehoods, or go against MY OWN 2011 advice to creationists, why should I bother correcting or challenging him?"

To summarise. In a CMI article dated August 2017 one Colin Gibson is quoted by one Warren Nunn as saying "How can things evolve at all when the Second Law of Thermodynamics says everything will ultimately degrade?" Yet in October 2011 CMI's chief scientist Jonathan Sarfati stated on the CMI website "I tend not to use entropy arguments at all for biological systems. I have yet to see the calculations involving either heat transfer or Boltzmann microstates involved for natural selection. Until creationists can do that, they should refrain from claiming that organic evolution contradicts the Second Law; a trite appeal to “things become more disordered according to the Second Law” is inadequate". Nunn, despite having been a journalist, FAILS to reference that CMI 2011 article and instead points to EARLIER thoughts from Sarfati - and claims that those thoughts were the (correct) understanding of the Second Law.

* The comment in question read: "I have emailed CMI and others concerning this article. Which fails to link to a more recent piece by Jonathan Sarfati on this topic - also on your website and dated 18 October 2011. I quote: "I tend not to use entropy arguments at all for biological systems. I have yet to see the calculations involving either heat transfer or Boltzmann microstates involved for natural selection. Until creationists can do that, they should refrain from claiming that organic evolution contradicts the Second Law; a trite appeal to “things become more disordered according to the Second Law” is inadequate"."

"Hi Ashley,It’s about time you started to behave consistently with you Bible denying, God rejecting, evolution embracing belief system. You have absolutely no basis for the moral outrage you display in your emails. Remember Richard’s famous statement about what our universe is like: no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference. Within your worldview, the universe couldn’t care less about your opinion. That’s tough. Just get used to it. You are constantly judging us by your idea of ethical behaviour, when you have no basis for deciding what ethical is. That, in my opinion demonstrates that you don’t really deep-down believe what you claim you believe.We’ve known each other a long time and you have suffered a lot of pain and anguish for so many years. Have a look at this verse: Acts 9:5--It is hard for you to kick against the goads. Face up to what is really inside of you. Stop fighting it. Find peace.Be blessed,"

"Ethics (and truth) exist whether the universe is godless or not.viewtopic.php?f=18&t=3823I used to be a Christian. I did not suddenly lose my sense of truth or ethics, just my evangelical faith.It is interesting how CMI are seeking to dismiss me (as someone who has suffered and therefore is 'angry') and thus dismiss my words too."

Sorensen also appears largely incapable of expressing himself in plain English (perhaps he is a computer not a real person?):"... their blind hate and seething rage prompts them to use science for leverage in their quest for the ideological supremacy of materialism and the promotion of their death cult of evolutionism".Er no, I just wanted to establish a few facts liar Bob.viewtopic.php?f=18&t=3823

"In what I call the Forum of Futility (where precious little science and logic are presented, and most people ignore the thing) [Bob NEVER ignores it and constantly attacks it though he also knows he is a liar so dares not come onto this page and get involved in direct one to one debate], a libelous criminal cyberstalker [LIAR] who execrates biblical creationists and people who disagree with him decided to attack the article linked above. In his quest for atheistic adoration [you are projecting your own mindset onto me Bob], he reproduced a letter that he sent to CMI. He has attacked them for many years (as well as other biblical creationist individuals and organizations). Surprisingly, even after he repeatedly calls people "liars" (I'm surprised that he left "fascist" out of this particular diatribe) [Bob IS a fascist but I do not have evidence that people at CMI are fascists], he received a response. In what is probably a copyright violation, he reproduced the reply but omitted the name of the sender.This sidewinder [Ad hominem] criticized Mr. Nunn for leaving out certain remarks made by Dr. Jonathan Sarfati regarding entropy as a creationary argument. Yes, Dr. Sarfati advised creationists to leave it alone, mainly because the argument is misused. However, the article under discussion was not a treatise on science, but was a discussion of Colin Gibson's faith [not according to the article's title]. The attacker used selective citing [LIAR], such as ignoring the link [I did NOT ignore the undated link] that contains Dr. Sarfati's remark:"I suggest that thermodynamic arguments are excellent when done properly, and the ‘open systems’ canard is anticipated. Otherwise I suggest concentrating on information content" (my emphasis added). [OK I will address that directly now - Sarfati lied that thermodynamic arguments can be 'excellent' against evolution yet failed to use them AT ALL in his 2010 book 'refuting Dawkins on evolution' and then in 2011 admitted on the CMI website "I tend not to use entropy arguments at all for biological systems. I have yet to see the calculations involving either heat transfer or Boltzmann microstates involved for natural selection. Until creationists can do that, they should refrain from claiming that organic evolution contradicts the Second Law; a trite appeal to “things become more disordered according to the Second Law” is inadequate.]The mocker [Ad hominem} also used ad hominems, affirming the consequent, argument from silence, straw man arguments, and other logical fallacies [more UNSPECIFIC and MEANINGLESS bile from the pseudo-intellectual Sorensen]. You can see his foolishness here [where Bob, do tell us]. Note the absence of links to material supporting his accusations [I did not require scientific references - but if fascist BOB would kindly read his email and STOP LYING he would see the links to the Dawkins 2009 book that I took the trouble to provide in my original email]. But hey, if The Mighty Atheist™ makes a claim, it must be true! [Yes] Yeah, that'll be the day." [No.]

But liar Bob did say one truthful thing:"Sure, I've mentioned thermodynamics, but I don't claim to be an expert in the subject."

Note also the COWARDLY, FALSELY ACCUSATORY and VENOMOUS against the bible.and.science.forum/Professor Tertius by Sorensen and his equally fascistic sidekick Long.

And the Sorensen LYING and HATRED continues: "For some reason, people like that like to (mis)use the Second Law of Thermodynamics." No we DON'T.

"They use ridicule [note in that email liar Bob], personal attacks [only when CMI dishonestly censored me], straw man arguments [LIAR], and so on [??] to make themselves and their spurious arguments [LIAR] look good (although defaming creationists does not make evolution any less false)" [defaming anti-creationists is the favourite weapon of creationists like Bob because creationists, 90% of them, are LIARS and extremists who hate scientific reality].

Jonathan Sarfati is now at odds with Cowboy Bob (or maybe the other way round).

CORRECTIONSorensen did link to this forum - in his underlined words "see his foolishness here".

If I make an unintentional error and discover my mistake (Sorensen might have pointed it out too somewhere but I have discovered it on my own) I correct my mistake.

Sorensen's rant typically fails to address the emails reproduced here in any detail. Much easier to behaviour like a primary school playground bully (playing to the gallery) and write stuff like "But hey, if The Mighty Atheist™ makes a claim, it must be true!" I was only agreeing with JONATHAN SARFATI on the Second Law of Thermodynamics. As his colleague at CMI acknowledged ie he did NOT say I was mistaken, rather he tried to make a different argument in order to dismiss my argument: "You have absolutely no basis for the moral outrage you display in your emails. Remember Richard’s famous statement about what our universe is like: no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference. Within your worldview, the universe couldn’t care less about your opinion. That’s tough. Just get used to it. You are constantly judging us by your idea of ethical behaviour, when you have no basis for deciding what ethical is."

"I attach two photos - one from The Question Evolution Project and one from The Question Evolution Project Debunked. All you have to do is decide which of the two people commenting - Bob Sorensen and then myself - is a pathological liar with fascistic tendencies and a terror of open debate about science and related topics. (The second person attacked by Sorensen is the bible.and.science.forum.)

First photo shows text here:https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/"Atheists and evolutionists get worked up about the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Two vicious attackers seem to be utilizing an undisclosed Law of Hate in their efforts to ridicule (therefore, silence) biblical creationists. They "refute" the material by ignoring evidence and logic, and asserting false claims."

Second photo shows text here:https://www.facebook.com/TQEPDebunked/?hc_location=ufi"After Bob's attack on my entropy piece also found its way onto 'The Question Evolution Project', Charlie Wolcott decided to post some more dogmatic comments, namely "They [atheists] NEED the universe to be an "open system",but that very notion violates the very principle of their entire worldview of naturalism". I don't see how since evolution has been possible on Earth because of solar radiation and the fact that Earth unlike the observable universe as a whole is an isolated system. As for Sorensen, I dealt with his attack here on 29 August: viewtopic.php?f=18&t=3823 His response to mine? Whinge and tell his supporters that I am a 'vicious attacker'. And lie that I 'refuted' "the material by ignoring evidence and logic, and asserting false claims". I did no such thing: https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/"

One of these people is evil. (And I did refute Bob's attack, on the BCSE community forum, and he cannot refute my refutation.)"

Being attacked here on 17 September:https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/ (photograph taken including of Bob's screenshot - and his angry red pen annotation where the bully accuses me of foolishness and bigotry)"A follow-up to the series on The Mighty Atheist™. In this excerpt from a venomous diatribe by Haywire the Stalker, he affirms fallacious thinking and bigotry: if an atheist says something, it must be true. Although it's not annotated, he made an accusation against me for not linking to something that was indeed clearly linked; he was in such a rush to spew hatred that he missed it the first time through. Also, I'm accused of not reading his e-mail. Uh, he's been blocked for a mighty long time, and even admits that he knows this. Does sending mail to accounts that block someone make sense on a planet of which I'm unaware? I believe that the brain cells of furious atheopaths are dying off more and more over time. I see this happening. -CBB"

Ignorance is no excuse. If you CHOOSE to refuse to read my emails (because you are a liar and because I detest liars and lying) don't then falsely claim that I affirm "fallacious thinking and bigotry" and instead DEAL WITH THE ACTUAL SUBSTANCE OF WHAT I WROTE AND WHICH, BECAUSE IT IS AT THE BCSE COMMUNITY, YOU HAVE INDEED READ.

Being attacked here on 17 September:https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/ (photograph taken including of Bob's screenshot - and his angry red pen annotation where the bully accuses me of foolishness and bigotry)"A follow-up to the series on The Mighty Atheist™. In this excerpt from a venomous diatribe by Haywire the Stalker, he affirms fallacious thinking and bigotry: if an atheist says something, it must be true. Although it's not annotated, he made an accusation against me for not linking to something that was indeed clearly linked; he was in such a rush to spew hatred that he missed it the first time through. Also, I'm accused of not reading his e-mail. Uh, he's been blocked for a mighty long time, and even admits that he knows this. Does sending mail to accounts that block someone make sense on a planet of which I'm unaware? I believe that the brain cells of furious atheopaths are dying off more and more over time. I see this happening. -CBB"

Ignorance is no excuse. If you CHOOSE to refuse to read my emails (because you are a liar and because I detest liars and lying) don't then falsely claim that I affirm "fallacious thinking and bigotry" and instead DEAL WITH THE ACTUAL SUBSTANCE OF WHAT I WROTE AND WHICH, BECAUSE IT IS AT THE BCSE COMMUNITY, YOU HAVE INDEED READ.

The meat machine called Ashley Haworth-Roberts is ego surfing again. He conveniently ignored other posts and comments on Cowboy Bob Sorensen's Facebook areas that pertain to him and this forum. The points that Cowboy Bob Sorensen makes have not been refuted. They are valid. It is irrational to complain that someone does not read email when the annoying email account has been blocked and the sender knows it. Ashley Haworth-Roberts has never show that Cowboy Bob Sorensen is lying or dishonest. The Cowboy may be mistaken but Ashley Haworth-Roberts hates him so intensely that he will not allow for errors and disagreements.

Being attacked here on 17 September:https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/ (photograph taken including of Bob's screenshot - and his angry red pen annotation where the bully accuses me of foolishness and bigotry)"A follow-up to the series on The Mighty Atheist™. In this excerpt from a venomous diatribe by Haywire the Stalker, he affirms fallacious thinking and bigotry: if an atheist says something, it must be true. Although it's not annotated, he made an accusation against me for not linking to something that was indeed clearly linked; he was in such a rush to spew hatred that he missed it the first time through. Also, I'm accused of not reading his e-mail. Uh, he's been blocked for a mighty long time, and even admits that he knows this. Does sending mail to accounts that block someone make sense on a planet of which I'm unaware? I believe that the brain cells of furious atheopaths are dying off more and more over time. I see this happening. -CBB"

Ignorance is no excuse. If you CHOOSE to refuse to read my emails (because you are a liar and because I detest liars and lying) don't then falsely claim that I affirm "fallacious thinking and bigotry" and instead DEAL WITH THE ACTUAL SUBSTANCE OF WHAT I WROTE AND WHICH, BECAUSE IT IS AT THE BCSE COMMUNITY, YOU HAVE INDEED READ.

The meat machine called Ashley Haworth-Roberts is ego surfing again. He conveniently ignored other posts and comments on Cowboy Bob Sorensen's Facebook areas that pertain to him and this forum. The points that Cowboy Bob Sorensen makes have not been refuted. They are valid. It is irrational to complain that someone does not read email when the annoying email account has been blocked and the sender knows it. Ashley Haworth-Roberts has never show that Cowboy Bob Sorensen is lying or dishonest. The Cowboy may be mistaken but Ashley Haworth-Roberts hates him so intensely that he will not allow for errors and disagreements.